CPN is designed and maintained by ONline @ UW: Electronic Publishing Group.

Topics: Civic Communication

Taking Back our Neighborhoods

A joint report by the Pew Center for Civic Journalism and The Poynter Institute for Media Studies. Copyright © 1995 Tides Foundation.

Anthony Alford Nobles, 26, and John Thomas Burnette, 27, were just two of the 122 people murdered in Charlotte in 1993 but the horror of their deaths touched the entire city like none of the others.

Nobles and Burnette were police officers who chased a suspect into the woods of West Charlotte the evening of October 5, 1993. Minutes later, fellow officers arriving to back them up discovered the two men; both had been shot in the head. Less than an hour later, they were pronounced dead. The protectors had become victims. They were the first Charlotte police officers killed in the line of duty since 1991, the first two to die together.

The shock rippled out, wrapping a city in mourning as residents struggled to understand and to cope. High school students raised money to buy bulletproof vests for police. Recreational facilities in the inner-city community the officers served were dedicated to their memory. Politicians made promises.

The staff of the Charlotte Observer quickly reacted to the breaking news, covering events as they unfolded on deadline and in the weeks that followed. But this story was different. This story demanded more than the usual.

"There was no discernible way to harness what was happening," recalled Cheryl Carpenter, assistant managing editor for local news. All over the newsroom, editors, and reporters were looking for ways to respond to the outpouring of grief and fear. Rick Thames was city editor. "It was clear to us and to readers that the city had a real problem. It was important to figure out some way to deal with it that would be constructive."

In the months ahead, the Observer embarked on a comprehensive long-term project designed to be as constructive as possible. The paper and its partner WSOC-TV would commit talented personnel, tons of newsprint and hours of valuable air time to a series of reports that would go far beyond traditional crime coverage and into the heart of the neighborhoods most affected by the violence.

Its most unusual elements would include forums for those who usually go unheard - residents of some of the city's most crime-ridden neighborhoods, and concrete lists of ways that residents and those outside the neighborhoods could help. These "needs lists" were assembled by a community coordinator working out of the Observer newsroom, while the United Way of Central Carolinas staffed phone banks and matched volunteers with needs.

By the spring of 1995 - some 18 months after the deaths of officers Nobles and Burnette - the Observer, using the logo "Taking Back our Neighborhoods," and WSOC-TV, titling its reports "Carolina Crime Solutions," had:

• Held a half-dozen town meetings in inner-city neighborhoods, where hundreds of residents accepted invitations to air their concerns.
• Inspired more than 700 groups or individuals to volunteer to meet various neighborhood needs.
• Triggered the city to raze dilapidated buildings, open long-promised parks and recreation facilities, and clear overgrown lots that were havens for illegal activity.
• Prompted 18 local law firms to file public nuisance suits, pro bono, to close neighborhood crack houses.
• Captured the attention of their peers. The Observer's effort was named a Pulitzer Prize finalist in the public service competition. WSOC-TV's broadcasts won a prestigious Headliner Award.

The Beginning

"I found a contrast between the spanking new downtown and so many beautiful neighborhoods and so many things that worked so well in the community. Yet there were these problems that seemed somewhat not talked about a lot," she said.

She had already been thinking about the need for the Observer to address crime as an issue, a need made more urgent by the deaths of Burnette and Nobles. "The whole issue of violent crime began to rear up. We began to talk about how to do a piece about crime in Charlotte and various neighborhoods," Buckner said. "How could we report about that in a way that wouldn't just feed fear and make the only public reaction . . . `Oh, now we know where never to go?' "

Then came a serendipitous phone call from a Knight-Ridder executive: The Pew Center for Civic Journalism was looking to jump-start some civic journalism projects. Did the Observer have anything that fit the bill?

"I said to Rick [Thames] `Do you think that there's actually a public journalism way to address this?' So the two things sort of came up - the connection between a story you've been thinking about in more traditional ways and [the] public journalism opportunity. "We were worried about how we would get people to talk about [crime] instead of just run from it."

As project director of "Your Vote in `92," Thames was well-versed in the concepts of civic journalism. "Your Vote," as it is known around the newsroom, was the Observer's first major civic journalism effort. In partnership with The Poynter Institute for Media Studies and WSOC-TV (the local ABC affiliate), the Observer staff led by Rich Oppel, Buckner's predecessor, redefined election coverage, focusing on what the voters wanted instead of reporting only what the politicians had to say. Thames also was familiar with the tools of civic journalism partnerships with other news organizations: polls, forums, and in-depth reporting of the issues.

Buckner was not in Charlotte for "Your Vote," but at Knight-Ridder she closely followed the project and a similar one at the company's Wichita Eagle.

"I was aware that there were areas where we didn't want to go too far. . . I knew it was very labor intensive so that wasn't a big surprise. I knew that if it worked, you would begin to see interaction."

Drafting a proposal for the Pew Center forced the Observer team - Buckner, Thames, Carpenter, and some of the project's reporters - to pull their ideas together. By the first week in February, Buckner was able to propose "our most ambitious effort yet in the realm of public journalism. The concept is simple: pinpoint - precisely - the sources of violent crime, and then challenge the community to pitch in and do something specifically about it."

An Ambitious Plan

• Sophisticated data analysis to show patterns of crime and to identify the neighborhoods the Observer would cover in depth. Reporter Ted Mellnik already was using newly available computerized police data to track violent crime in Charlotte. Very early in his research, a pattern began to emerge - 60 percent of all violent crime took place in 42 neighborhoods located in a crescent-shaped area around the central city; 30 percent took place in a handful of those neighborhoods.
• Polling to gather data about the people who live in those neighborhoods. For instance, who had been a victim of crime? Who owned a gun? Pollsters gathered information about the effects of crime on peoples' lives, sought feedback on the reasons for crime, and invited ideas for possible solutions.
• A town meeting in each of the neighborhoods selected for in-depth coverage. The meetings offered the chance for dialogue about the problems and for interaction with experts and agencies.
• A partnership with at least one commercial television station. The Observer envisioned the station coordinating live events such as call-ins and tours of a particular neighborhood with the newspaper's profile of that neighborhood.

Each neighborhood report was crafted to encourage action on two fronts: To bolster efforts of neighborhood residents in Charlotte's "crime crescent" and to give Charlotte residents living outside these areas a stake in reclaiming those neighborhoods.

The series showed how the city's crime affected not only the personal safety of Charlotte residents but their pocketbooks as well. And it gave readers human faces behind the crime statistics. "These people were living with violent crime to an extent the rest of us don't understand," Thames said.

WSOC-TV Signs On

Kronley was intrigued by the possibilities of another partnership with the Observer and the chance to focus on an important issue. "You don't just do something because it's there or someone else has done it successfully. You do it because it makes sense to do it," said Kronley. "You need to find an issue that's important to your viewers - not journalists. Give people information they're interested in or they don't give a damn. If they don't give a damn, you've got the wrong story."

The topic proposed by the Observer made sense. Moreover, Kronley saw an advantage to giving an issue like crime some focus and greater depth than spot news coverage allowed. But while Kronley wanted to partner with the Observer, he also saw the opportunity for a more sweeping crime project than the newspaper had suggested for "Taking Back our Neighborhoods." For that reason, WSOC termed its efforts "Carolina Crime Solutions," a snappy name that would cover a wider variety of stories.

There had been precedent in Charlotte for media partnering under different names: In 1992 when the Observer called its election project "Your Vote in `92," WSOC called it "Election `92." During cross-promoted events for the crime series, however, WSOC's title became "Carolina Crime Solutions/ Taking Back our Neighborhoods."

The name wasn't the only difference. Kronley was able to get some stories on the air long before the Observer published its first profile. When the Observer was ready to launch its project, WSOC worked with the newspaper to produce each neighborhood town meeting and a later Sunday prime-time special that appeared the same day as the Observer's report on a particular neighborhood. In addition, the station produced two enterprise reports each week, ran public service announcements, and aired personal safety tips with breaking crime reports. For instance, how to protect against a carjacking or mugging at an automated teller machine.

Police reporter Mark Becker was given two days a week and travel funds to prepare two-minute stories about potential solutions to crime problems in Charlotte and solutions already underway in other communities; his series aired Mondays. Reporter Kim Brattain had two days a week to produce a profile of an individual or organization trying to make a difference in Charlotte; her reports appeared on Fridays. Both aired during the 5:30 p.m. newscast. Becker's first segment - a look at code enforcement laws that could be used to close crack houses - ran February 16, 1994. Since then, he has produced more than four dozen reports.

"I've been reporting 12 years - 10 in this market. This has given me an opportunity to do more in-depth work, looking in a constructive way towards solutions," said Becker, who added that the satisfaction offset the odd hours he has had to work to get the stories.

Becker finds his subjects like any good reporter - through research and tips. He doesn't coordinate with Brattain. "I don't know if it's good or bad but I enjoy the independence and the autonomy."

Guaranteed air time for a reporter is also an incentive. "Management has made a commitment to making [`Carolina Crime Solutions'] part of this newsroom," he said. Four days of reporter time per week makes it a "pretty high" priority - especially in a newsroom where every reporter is expected to produce a package a day, he said.

Kronley didn't stop there; he added a part-time producer to coordinate "Carolina Crime Solutions." Lori Arrington, an experienced television and radio reporter, had been away from the station for a year when Kronley offered her the 28-hour-a-week job as special events producer. She welcomed the chance. "In this job, I'm not just looking at the bad. I'm looking for positive solutions. Everyone at this station is part of this project. It's like a breath of fresh air."

Arrington quickly realized that the job was part time on paper but full time in nature as she juggled daily stories, produced the specials and spent countless hours in the neighborhoods.

At the Observer

"My biggest fear - it wasn't a huge fear - but I was afraid that the neighborhoods would feel invaded by us, that they would feel they had journalism done to them," recalled Buckner. "What good will we really do if we all we do is deepen fears and make divisions?"

To forestall that kind of reaction, the Observer team focused on ways to involve the community, including:

• The formation of a core advisory panel in each neighborhood. The panel included community leaders, longtime residents, and others with a stake in the area; it provided an entry point into the neighborhood. A larger "citizens' panel" was composed of poll respondents who agreed to participate further.
• A partnership with WPEG-FM and its sister station WBAV-AM/FM, the stations drawing most of the market's black radio listeners. The stations tape discussion shows - Community Focus on WPEG and Straight Talk on WBAV - that aired the same Sunday each Observer neighborhood profile and WSOC-TV special appeared.
• News packages for each individual neighborhood that offered very specific opportunities - a list of neighborhood needs - to help Charlotte residents become involved by donating goods, time or services. The United Way of Central Carolinas agreed to help channel volunteers responding to the "needs list" through its volunteer center.

One component that would prove integral to the project's success arrived later.

Missing Piece

"Are you prepared to deal with it?" he asked.

"We tap danced around a little," recalled Carpenter. Then Pew's Ed Fouhy chimed in, "Perhaps we can help you with that." The result was funding for a community coordinator, who was hired as a consultant.

"The community coordinator really helped us in ways we hadn't thought of," Buckner said.

The coordinator organized the advisory panels during the reporting, worked with WSOC's Arrington to set up town meetings, and assembled the "needs list." Perhaps most important to some, the coordinator linked the Observer to the neighborhoods after the journalists moved on. The ideal community coordinator for this project needed to understand how the media worked, interact comfortably with people ranging from business executives to elderly residents afraid to open their doors, and have organizational skills.

Charlene Price-Patterson fit the bill. With a background in television as a community affairs manager, Price-Patterson already had experience planning public events and working with the community and the news media. In addition to having her hands on the pulse of the community, Price-Patterson had one other attribute: She is an African-American woman who grew up in what she calls the "ghetto" of Buffalo, N.Y.

While Price-Patterson has a desk in the Observer newsroom, she has spent most of her time in the field, visiting neighborhoods, attending community meetings and other functions, or checking on the results of the volunteer efforts.

A New Offensive

Coupled with Mellnik's computer-assisted reporting of crime demographics, the poll offered a news hook for the project. On Sunday, June 5, the front page of the Observer carried articles about two different wars: the lead stories commemorated the 50th anniversary of D-Day while the bulk of the page launched a new offensive, "Taking Back our Neighborhoods."

Designed by Dwuan June, the front-page package set the tone for the series. Individual residents were featured in three pictures, each in a box containing a quote against a stylized backdrop of the downtown skyline that would later become the logo for the project.

Project reporters Liz Chandler, Ted Mellnik, and Gary L. Wright drew portraits of residents affected by violent crime to explain the startling crime data while Ames Alexander did the same with the poll results. At Thames' urging, Buckner became part of the package with a letter from the editor and her photo anchoring the page.

Buckner laid out the reasons for "Taking Back our Neighborhoods/Carolina Crime Solutions" and explained the way the project would work. She urged readers to watch WSOC-TV and to listen to WPEG-FM and WBAV-AM. Her column jumped to the last page of the package and concluded with a "call us" box, asking for ideas about how individuals can "take back our neighborhoods."

On four inside pages devoted completely to the series, readers were shown how crime affected other Charlotte residents emotionally and economically, and they were introduced to residents who were working to fix their neighborhoods. Key problems - drug abuse, guns, unemployment, unsupervised children - identified by the poll were explored in six sidebars that included some potential solutions. Each problem was seen through the eyes of a resident. For instance, instead of reporting that 72 percent of those polled believe the availability of guns contribute greatly to crime and that 67 percent believe tougher penalties for illegal firearm sales would reduce the problem, the Observer introduced Rogers Worthy, a former cab driver shot in the head by a rider. The bullet was still in his head.

The project's launch continued at 6:30 that night with a half-hour special on WSOC-TV that included a roundtable discussion about crime solutions; the panelists were residents of the troubled neighborhoods, law enforcement officials, and civic leaders. The poll launch set the stage for the first of the neighborhood profile packages: Seversville, where one in every nine residents had been the victim of violent crime.

Creating a Template

• Starting with poll participants and community leaders, the reporters and Price-Patterson made contacts in the area. Price-Patterson started gathering information for the neighborhood's "needs list."
• With input from others, Price-Patterson organized an advisory panel and planned a meeting in the neighborhood for the reporters and editors to explain the project and hear about the community's problems. The Seversville advisory panel of 15 people, for instance, met for two hours on June 16 in a small meeting room at an apartment complex. The discussion about crack houses, unemployment, and a desire for parents to take responsibility for their own children was credited later with influencing the Observer's coverage.
• A town meeting was scheduled at a neighborhood church or school. WSOC-TV produced these events, which became the centerpiece of its half-hour special several weeks later; the partners cross-promoted the meeting. Arrington and Price-Patterson papered the neighborhood with fliers urging residents to attend.
• Either before or after the town meeting, the United Way sponsored a "resource fair" to showcase such agencies as Legal Services and Crime Watch that could work with residents to solve some of the neighborhood's problems. At the Seversville fair, more than 60 residents signed up to participate in a new Crime Watch; within weeks that number quadrupled.
• WSOC anchor Bill Walker moderated the town meeting. It was covered as spot news by the newspaper, radio stations, and television and taped by WSOC for the special. WPEG also taped the event for use in its special reports. More than 200 people turned out for the first town meeting on the evening of June 28 at the Clinton Chapel AME Zion Church in Seversville.

On July 17, the Observer turned over nearly seven full pages to an examination of life in Seversville. The report included a front-page letter from Buckner, more than a dozen photos, answers to frequently asked questions about specific problems, and the "needs list." People who wanted to volunteer to meet some of those needs were urged to call a phone number that appeared in bold type at the top of the "needs" page. Seversville residents, for instance, said they needed such things as signs to identify the neighborhood, leaders for a Girl Scout troop, uniforms for a fledgling all-girl drill team, and tickets to recreational events.

The Observer's editorial section featured a lead editorial about the neighborhood. The front of the paper's Perspective section reported on the difficulty of providing activities for children in a neighborhood without a community center and very few outlets for recreation.

In a deliberate element of the package's design, the lead news story jumped from Page One to four other pages inside the A section to be sure the reader came into contact with every aspect of the main package. The cohesive look stemmed largely from a decision to detach front-page layout editor Dwuan June for a week before each neighborhood report ran. June worked with the project team in the interim, too.

"If there are any concerns I have, I can get those concerns through" to the editors and reporters, June said. "Ideally, I think this is how packages like this should be done."

Another member of the project team, copy editor Tony Moor, edited each neighborhood package. Moor, one of two blacks on the main copy desk, was not there just to check spelling or the accuracy of addresses.

"Language is a big thing," said Moor. "In this series, we got away from the term inner city - for one thing, it doesn't always apply. [And] it's another negative. We used the phrase central city instead. It means the same thing but it's too new to have a very negative connotation."

The Seversville media blitz continued at noon that Sunday when WPEG used its weekly Community Focus show to interview community residents; WBAV aired segments on its Straight Talk program. At 6:30 p.m., WSOC-TV aired its half-hour special. Anchor Debi Faubion began the program by reading the "Carolina Crime Solutions" mission statement as it scrolled across the screen.

Faubion conducted the live segment from the studio, where an eight-person phone bank staffed by United Way volunteers took calls. Throughout the special, viewers interested in volunteering were urged to call the local and toll-free numbers shown frequently on the screen; at the end of the special, viewers were given a number to call during the week. Faubion referred to the Observer's "needs list" as one place to start for people looking for ways to help.

She also introduced several features about the neighborhood, including one by a photographer who spent the night following two community police officers. In another piece, Mark Becker took viewers on a tour through decrepit homes owned by absentee landlords, then showed the manicured home of one of those landlords

. Only the most powerful snippets of the 90-minute, town-hall meeting appeared in the television special. In one telling exchange, the Rev. Retoy Gaston said: "We need a [recreation] center. That's what we need."

That prompted Anchor Bill Walker to call on Wayne Weston, head of the Parks and Recreation Department, who said the department intended to provide recreational activities.

"What date do you want to start?" Gaston asked. Another resident pleaded, "If you're going to tell [young people] not to do something, give them something to do."

Responses quickly rolled in. Charlotte Mayor Richard Vinroot pledged a recreation center for Seversville. Dozens of callers offered their help; some of the volunteers and their promises were highlighted in a Monday follow-up, accompanied by another list of items or services still needed.

The Monday reports were an integral part of the series. From the start, the Observer team wanted to spotlight neighborhoods where solutions already were underway. They decided to pair each troubled neighborhood with a nearby progressive neighborhood, which is profiled on the Monday after media-blitz Sunday. The second-day package also started on Page One, but was produced on a slightly smaller scale, with fewer inside pages.

Genesis Park was paired with Seversville. It was a community that had pushed drug dealers out and reduced crime more than 50 percent in five years. Reporter Gary L. Wright showed what strong-willed residents, attention, tax dollars, and police work had done for the community. That success story reinforced the potential and hope for Seversville. In the months that followed, the Observer profiled several more pairs of neighborhoods. Each report has drawn significant response from the community at large.

Making a Difference

"It's the most accessible stuff we've ever done. We're giving you a way to get active in civic life," said editor Carpenter. "I've had journalists at conferences say `You're asking people to do silly stuff.' This is a mushy side of me but I don't see anything wrong with buying kids a pair of shoes."

She recalled a newsroom visit by two criminologists at the beginning of the project. "They told an anecdote about a controversial study where one community was given money, the other brass plaques. The money was like crack cocaine; it lasted 15 minutes and then it died. The brass plaques brought pride and the neighborhood took off in a new direction." WSOC-TV's Walker agreed. "My response to [the criticism] is if people's lives are a little better then what's wrong with it?"

In many cases, the media scrutiny of the individual neighborhoods drew action where earlier citizen complaints had received only shrugs. North Charlotte activist Michelle Tidwell, 38, and the mother of two, had repeatedly asked city officials to clear an overgrown lot where a neighbor's daughter was raped but was told nothing could be done. The victim's mother saw the North Charlotte town meeting as a chance to try again. The next day WSOC-TV examined the complaints in a news report. Five days later the lot was cleared.

The Observer's coverage of one town meeting, about North Charlotte, on January 10, 1995, prompted an urban planner to complain in a letter to the editor that the reporter had ignored all the positive things about a neighborhood that was improving. Michelle Tidwell disagreed. Her letter to the editor said: "Thank the Lord for the power of the press. I commend the Observer, WSOC and WPEG for the responsible way they have organized and presented some of the problems in North Charlotte. If it weren't for them, I would not at last be receiving phone calls and responses about the needs of the. . . community."

The often-instant response to media coverage gratifies Arrington. It frustrates her, too. "It angers me to a degree. Why won't [the officials] just listen to [the community]?" "It's unfortunate but it's reality that sometimes it takes a wrong being exposed by the media for something to finally happen," Kronley said.

Another Observer series published between the launch of "Taking Back our Neighborhoods" and the Seversville package made a difference, too. Reporter Ricki Morell spent months examining the role of absentee landlords and their relationship with tenants. Her research began before "Taking Back our Neighborhoods" but eventually was integrated into the project.

Morell's stories revealed that it had been three years since the city used the "public nuisance" laws to close down a crack house and reported details about landlords who paid little attention to their tenants. Her reports received a quick reaction. The mayor appealed for help and at least 18 private law firms responded with offers to file pro bono "public nuisance" suits to close crack sites.

Results were the fuel that kept project reporters going as the weeks turned into months and the intense pace took its toll and neighborhood problems began to sound alike. "It's tiring and after a while [the series] begins to sound repetitive," said reporter Liz Chandler. "After a while it wears on you. It's depressing to be hanging out there, hanging in the 'hood talking to kids. Some part of me hungers to be back on GA (general assignment) or back on a project. But I know it's making a difference so I'd sign on again."

"We're actually seeing stuff happen," said her colleague Ames Alexander. "We're seeing these folks who have been kicking and screaming for years getting some attention. Like it nor not, public officials don't always listen when the average Joe calls."

As a police reporter, WSOC's Mark Becker spends most of his time reporting on the daily effects of violent crime, an almost entirely negative task. His work on "Carolina Crime Solutions" offered a kind of antidote. "It's a nice switch - the opportunity to stand back and feel good about what we're doing."

Work in Progress

One of reporter Wright's chief concerns is "keeping it fresh." The repetitive nature, the emotional drain, and the need to involve more people in the newsroom make good arguments for rotating in new reporters.

When Jim Walser, the assistant managing editor now overseeing "Taking Back our Neighborhoods," approached the project's reporters in January 1995, however, none wanted out. Walser was relieved. "I don't have to retrain people in what we're trying to get done." He said he would try to rotate other reporters into the project from time to time.

Besides keeping the project fresh and maintaining a high profile, the partners are grappling with sustaining interest in the neighborhoods they have profiled. Price-Patterson continues to represent the Observer in the neighborhoods, returning for community meetings or just stopping by to check on volunteer projects or visit residents. The reporters revisit the neighborhoods from time to time for follow-ups.

When Price-Patterson begins work with a community, she said, "I tell them I hope that when we leave here, you will feel more empowered."

It is too soon to tell if the neighborhoods can continue to make progress after the media spotlight has moved on. It is not too soon, though, to see that officers Nobles and Burnette left a living legacy.

Back to Civic Communication Index